摘要
欧洲人权法院2009年M诉德国案判决的主要争议在于德国刑法上的保安监督是否为一种刑罚以及保安监督是否具有溯及既往的效力。对此,德国联邦宪法法院和德国政府坚持形式主义的刑罚概念,认为保安监督只是德国刑法上的一种保安处分措施,而不是一种刑罚;与此不同,欧洲人权法院则主张实质主义的刑罚概念,认为德国刑法上的保安监督无异于一种刑罚。这两种不同的刑罚概念背后是国家主义与自由主义之间的对立。从实质主义的刑罚概念出发,我国的劳动教养制度就不只是一种单纯的行政措施而是一种刑罚,因此有必要将其纳入刑法的规制之中。
The main controversy over M v. Germany of ECHR in 2009 is whether the security measure in German Penal Code is a punishment and whether this measure has a retrospective effect. On this issue, German Constitutional Court and German government adhere to a formalist concept of punishment and argue that the security measure in German Penal Code is merely a kind of security actions but not a kind of punishment. On the contrary, European Court of Human Rights argues that the security measure in German Penal Code is no less than a kind of punishment. Behind these two concepts lies in the conflict between nationalism and liberalism. From the perspective of substantial concept of punishment, it can be administrative measure, while it is nal code. argued that reform-through-labor in China is not merely a kind of a kind of punishment. Therefore, it should be included in the penal code.
出处
《时代法学》
2012年第4期96-103,共8页
Presentday Law Science
基金
国家社科基金课题"比较视野下我国监禁刑的适用规模研究"(批准号11CFX049)的阶段性成果
关键词
双轨制
保安监督
刑罚
形式主义
实质主义
劳动教养
dual system
security measure
punishment
formalist
substantial
reform-through-labor
